S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Specified domestic transaction-Concurrent findings of appellate authorities that assessee had received intra-group services-Matter remanded by Tribunal to Transfer Pricing Officer to consider afresh from perspective of findings Held, no infirmity in order of Tribunal remanding matter for fresh consideration. [S.92CA(3) 254(1), 260A.]

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Specified domestic transaction-Reimbursement of expatriate employees salaries-Net margin method-Order of Tribunal affirmed. [S. 37(1), 92C, 92CA, R.10A(d), 260A]

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Specified domestic transaction-Royalty-Most appropriate method-SLP of revenue dismissed. [Art. 136]

S. 80IC : Special category States-Industrial undertaking-Approval of local or State authority-Section 80-IC(2)(b)(ii) does not require such agreement or approval-Requirement under rule 18BBB(4) and form 10CCB cannot be read as mandatory where parent provision does not stipulate it-The issue not constituted grounds of appeal-Tribunal erred in examining the issue not constituted grounds of appeal-Order of Tribunal was set aside. [S. 80IC)2)(b)(ii), 80IA(4),254(1), 260A, R.188BBB]

S.80IA: Industrial undertakings-Enterprises engaged in infrastructure development-Does not restrict computation of gross total income-Restricts deduction under any other provision under heading C to extent of deduction claimed under section 80IA-The aggregate deduction under section 80IA and other provisions under heading C of Chapter VI-A do not exceed 100 per cent. of the profits of the business of the assessee, is logical and correct. [S. 4(1), 80AB, 80B(5), 80HHC, 80IA(9), Chap. VI-A.]

S. 72 : Carry forward and set off of business losses-Investment business-Capital loss-Notional loss-Fall in value of equity shares-Sale of non-convertible debentures-Order of Tribunal allowing loss as carry forward loss not erroneous. [S 10(2A), 260A]

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Real estate business-Order of Tribunal was affirmed-Order of Tribunal was reversed in so far as the purchases from the two parties were concerned-However, the total additions should not exceed the total purchases from them.[S. 68, 133(6), 260A]

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Bogus purchases-Purchase of newsprint-Ad hoc disallowance of 15 per cent. reduced to 5 per cent. by Tribunal-Assessee accepting 5 per cent. Order of Tribunal affirmed. [S.37(1), 56, 131, 153(3), 246A, 260A]

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Bogus purchases-Information from Investigation Wing-Restriction of disallowance by Tribunal to 6 per cent. justified.[143(3), 147, Art. 226]

S. 69C : Unexplained expenditure-Bogus purchases-Only income component of disputed purchases taxable-Restriction of disallowance by Tribunal to six per cent. justified. [S. 132, 143(3) 147, 260A]